QBC-MONTREAL-L Archives

Archiver > QBC-MONTREAL > 2011-03 > 1300584063


From: "Mary D. Taffet" <>
Subject: Re: [MONTREAL] Curious about 2 marriage records for the same couple
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 21:21:07 -0400
References: <063B9EF95E8D46B094F8DE8CC360A647@mather7e0eb9b3>
In-Reply-To: <063B9EF95E8D46B094F8DE8CC360A647@mather7e0eb9b3>


Dorothy,

Thanks for your reply. As I just replied to Cathy, this particular
couple had no children as far as I know, so whatever happened would most
likely not have been the result of any child.

Bridget is obviously not my direct ancestor (as she had no children) :).
She was the daughter of my great-grandmother's brother Bernard
McClosky. Bridget and my grandfather were therefore first cousins, so
she is my first cousin twice removed.

-- Thanks,
Mary


On 3/19/2011 8:03 PM, genechaser wrote:
>
> Hi Mary,
>
> The two marriages were nine months apart - not a long time and not unusual -
> just long enough to have a child, maybe.
>
> I suspect what occurred might be what happened with my maternal gt.
> grandparents' marriage. They, too, were married in St. John the Evangelist
> church and my gt. grandmother was pregnant with my grandfather at the
> time....she was Anglican; my gt. grandfather was Roman Catholic. In order
> to avoid embarrassment of having a child out of wedlock, they hastily
> married in the Anglican church. Within several months, their marriage was
> "blessed" in St. Patrick's Catholic Church and as a result, all nine of
> their children were baptized there over time. A marriage between a Catholic
> and non-Catholic is indeed a legal document, but in a case such as this, the
> marriage was not recognized by the Catholic church. This is what might have
> happened in the case of your ancestor OR it could be the Catholic party
> might have had a change of heart and insisted being 'remarried' in order to
> have their children baptized as Catholics. I checked this out with a
> Catholic priest when I was working on my file.
>
> The birth of my grandfather was "extended" by exactly one month on his
> baptismal record. Our family always celebrated his birthday on 21 Dec. 1878
> when in fact, he was actually born 21 Nov. 1878. To add to the confusion,
> his record of baptism stated: "The twenty-second of November one thousand
> eight hundred and seventy-eight, we the undersigned priest hereby have
> baptized Reuben Thomas born yesterday of the lawful marriage of William
> James, brassfinisher, and Charlotte Langford of this parish. The sponsors
> were Thomas Beresford and Ellen, his sister. Both undersigned with the
> father". Two things are worthy of note in this record...(1) the record
> states "baptized" on Dec. 21 1878, not born. Secondly, his father's surname
> is incorrect..he was actually William James Geeves, not William James. The
> name, William James was also written in the margin in a different
> handwriting. Makes you wonder, doesn't it??
>
> Dorothy
> Ottawa
>
>
>
> One of the McClosk(e)y's in my file is Bridget McClosk(e)y who married
> George Downham/Dawnham. Just today I realized that there were two separate
> marriage records for them. What surprises me is not that there are two
> marriage records (they were raised in different faiths), but rather that
> they are dated so far apart. The first marriage took place on June 17. 1886
> at "Anglican Saint John the Evangelist":
>
> <http://search.ancestry.com/iexec?htx=view&r=an&dbid=1091&iid=d13p_1164d0061
> &fn=Bridget&ln=McClosky&st=r&ssrc=&pid=13565870>
>
> The second marriage took place on April 14, 1887 at
> "Notre-Dame-du-Bon-Conseil":
>
> <http://search.ancestry.com/iexec?htx=view&r=an&dbid=1091&iid=d13p_1114c1731
> &fn=George&ln=Downhurrd&st=r&ssrc=&pid=11343797>
>
>
> I'm wondering if anybody can explain why these two different marriages might
> take place so far apart?
>
> -- Thanks,
> Mary

This thread: